Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals
· Free Stuff
· Contests and Sweepstakes
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-05-2009, 05:53 PM   #1
rogue1979
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,062
Default Phenom 9150e overclocking?

9150e quad core only $79 at newegg.

Has anyone tried overclocking these yet? Stock speed is only 1.8GHz.

They are rated at 65W, I wonder if a cheaper motherboard with decent overclocking options could reach 3.0GHz?

Just wondering if it was worth trying one out and getting more performance out of it than my current C2D at 3.0GHz. Would a Phenom II at 2.5GHz match a C2D at 3.0GHz in gaming benchmarks?
__________________
Heatware - rogue1979
rogue1979 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2009, 05:53 PM   #2
deputc26
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 509
Default Phenom 9150e overclocking?

9150e is a Phenom I 65nm proc. Avoid it.
deputc26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2009, 07:25 PM   #3
LoneNinja
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 824
Default Phenom 9150e overclocking?

If I recall correctly when it was released it was an absolute terrible overclocker, they couldn't even reach 2.4Ghz with it. Than again that was before SB750 and at a time that even the Phenom 9850 was lucky to hit 3.0Ghz.

C2D is faster than Phenom II, and the majority of games can't use more than 2 cores. You'll loose performance in most games going from a 3.0Ghz C2D to a 2.5Ghz Phenom II.
LoneNinja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2009, 12:27 AM   #4
Scholzpdx
Diamond Member
 
Scholzpdx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,749
Default Phenom 9150e overclocking?

These are only good in a permanent HTPC setup or a CPU that just continuously folds w/ GPUs 24/7.

Gaming it wont be super fast, but everything else (especially multitasking) will be pretty good.
__________________
Desktop: Q8200 @2.8GHz - 6GB DDR2 PC-6400 - Radeon 6870 1GB - 1680x1050 22" - X-Fi Xtreme Audio - 80GB OCZ SSD - 2.6TB on 3x HDD

Official Member of the ATOT Night Crew
Scholzpdx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2009, 02:46 AM   #5
cusideabelincoln
Diamond Member
 
cusideabelincoln's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,187
Default Phenom 9150e overclocking?

You won't reach 3.0 GHz with a Phenom 9150e, and you'd be lucky to even reach 2.4 GHz.

Quote:
Just wondering if it was worth trying one out and getting more performance out of it than my current C2D at 3.0GHz. Would a Phenom II at 2.5GHz match a C2D at 3.0GHz in gaming benchmarks?
The Phenom 9150, like mentioned, is not a Phenom II processor. However considering you have an Allendale processor at 3.0 GHz, if you did have a Phenom (I, not II) at 2.5 GHz, it should match your current gaming performance and will definitely exceed it if you play a game which can take advantage of the extra two cores on a Phenom X4.

Quote:
Originally posted by: LoneNinja
C2D is faster than Phenom II, and the majority of games can't use more than 2 cores. You'll loose performance in most games going from a 3.0Ghz C2D to a 2.5Ghz Phenom II.
You forget to take into account he has an E4300. It only has 2MB of L2 cache, which hurts its gaming performance. A Phenom X4 (either the first generation or the Phenom II) @ 2.5 GHz will match an Allendale @ 3.0 GHz. I don't have direct numbers, but here's the best I could do.

My assumption: The difference in clock speed between these proposed processors is such that the E4300 has about a 22% advantage. AT's benches don't have C2D with 2MB L2 cache processors clocked that high, so I'm going to substitue in a lower clocked Phenom and a lower clocked C2D but keeping that same 22% advantage.

So I'm going to the lowly Phenom 9650, which runs at 2.3 GHz. The Core 2 Duo will need to run at approximately 2.8 GHz to keep the 22% clock speed discrepancy. Since there are no 65nm Allendale processors with that clock speed in AT's bench, I'm going to substitute yet again a newer 45nm Pentium Dual Core. If you look at the benches, clock for clock the 45nm Pentium Dual cores basically perform the same as the Allendale processors in gaming applications. To verify just compare the E4600 vs. E5200 vs. E4700. You'll see the frames per second are very, very close.

So in my substitution, I'm going to use the new E6300, although I do believe proportionally speaking it's faster than the Pentium Dual cores and Allendales***. And the results: http://www.anandtech.com/bench...3.44.45.46.47.48.49.50

They are a mixed bag. Some games favor more cores, some games favor better clock speed. Regardless of this statement, the frames per second are pretty close such that when the graphical load is put on the GPU I feel as if a Phenom X4 @ 2.5 GHz will indeed give someone the same gaming experience as an Allendale Core 2 Duo @ 3 GHz.


***Footnote: By that I mean it seems it performs better per clock than the other processors. IThe E6300 holds a 7.7% clockspeed advantage over the E5300, yet it holds a greater performance advantage in some of the gaming tests. http://www.anandtech.com/bench...3.44.45.46.47.48.49.50

In Crysis, the E6300 is 11% faster. In L4D and Far Cry 2, it's 15% faster. I'm not sure what is causing this. It might be the FSB speed. If true, then these would bring me previous findings into better light as this user has an overclocked processor in which the FSB is higher than normal.
__________________
| i5 2500k | GTX 560 Ti || Phenom X4 925 | HD 3850 |
cusideabelincoln is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.